Money over Championships

Well, once again, it's clear that for most players in the NBA, pursuing a Championship is a secondary consideration, the first being money. Players who are already multi-multi-millionaires turn down chances to be with contenders, and choose to go with crappy teams that offer a little more money.

We've seen this over the years but it just seems like it's getting worse. There's probably no cure, and maybe it's good because it spreads talent throughout the league. That's the idea of the salary cap, right?

But as a Spurs fan, it just galls me year after year to see these players pass on a proven Champion like the Spurs, to go play with the Clippers or the Warriors or whoever. You would think that the chance of getting a ring would work in the Spurs' favor, but it doesn't. It always seems to pale in comparison to that extra 2 or 3 million dollars.

In my ideal world, the league would try to rectify the situation by adding some incentive for players to want to win a Championship. You know, something like prize money? That's what boxers and tennis players compete for. Imagine if there was some incentive to winning a Championship besides just a ring and "bragging rights"? I think then you'd see players wanting to be on better teams like the Spurs, and possibly playing harder.

But I'm biased on this because I'm a Spurs fan. For the rest of league, this system is probably a good thing. :depressed

:jack

I want Stephen Jackson

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by leemajors

:jack

---

He made the right decision, a championship isn't worth $20 mils. If some other company offer me twice the salary, I will be jumping over the ship in no time.

Keep it real, homies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nil.ball

He made the right decision, a championship isn't worth $20 mils. If some other company offer me twice the salary, I will be jumping over the ship in no time.

Keep it real, homies.

---

Yep. In Maggette's case, the money was to good to turn down.

I love my damn Spurs, but they also value the dollar over the player, like the player values the dollar over the team.They chose not to pay Scola,Jackson,and others I'm sure I can't even think of.They choose not to take chances for the sake of flexability.I'm sure they have a couple of solid backup scenarios.:smokin

There is no guarantee he ever wins a championship with the spurs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peskypesky

Well, once again, it's clear that for most players in the NBA, pursuing a Championship is a secondary consideration, the first being money. Players who are already multi-multi-millionaires turn down chances to be with contenders, and choose to go with crappy teams that offer a little more money.

We've seen this over the years but it just seems like it's getting worse. There's probably no cure, and maybe it's good because it spreads talent throughout the league. That's the idea of the salary cap, right?

But as a Spurs fan, it just galls me year after year to see these players pass on a proven Champion like the Spurs, to go play with the Clippers or the Warriors or whoever. You would think that the chance of getting a ring would work in the Spurs' favor, but it doesn't. It always seems to pale in comparison to that extra 2 or 3 million dollars.

In my ideal world, the league would try to rectify the situation by adding some incentive for players to want to win a Championship. You know, something like prize money? That's what boxers and tennis players compete for. Imagine if there was some incentive to winning a Championship besides just a ring and "bragging rights"? I think then you'd see players wanting to be on better teams like the Spurs, and possibly playing harder.

But I'm biased on this because I'm a Spurs fan. For the rest of league, this system is probably a good thing. :depressed

---

As a Spurs fan, I hear ya. Yet we all know it doesn't work that way in sports and it certainly doesn't work that way in real life. If faced with the choice between accepting more money to go with an inferior, average-size, mid-performing company, rather that take substantially less money from a proven Fortune 500 company that was perennially tops in its industry, I would guess that all of us would go with the $$$. I doubt there are any of us who would decide otherwise.

Unfortunately it's no different for the players. After all, they have only a finite window to earn the most money they can. Once their NBA playing days are over, so are the big salaries. Furthermore, it's usually the NBA superstars that are concerned, sometimes obsessed, with their winning a championship in order to preserve or enhance their respective NBA legacies. They can afford to do so because they're already making the maximum dollars allowed.

Your typical, run-of-the-mill, NBA player simply doesn't have that luxury and ultimately doesn't care that much about winning a title. It's a sad fact, but true. For the average NBA player, it's far more important to secure the salary and privledged lifestyle for as long as they can.

As long as there are owners and GMs willing overvalue talent by carelessly throwing money around and giving maximum contracts to average players, we'll continued to see this trend.

Championships are fine, but they do not provide financial security of say a big contract.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rascal

There is no guarantee he ever wins a championship with the spurs.

---

I wasn't talking just about Maggette. I was talking about most free agents. And I never said it was a guarantee that Maggette would win a Championship with the Spurs, but you really think he'll have anywhere as good a shot with the Warriors? Really?

Nowadays, players can throw a fit and demand trades. It's almost to the point where players can tell GM's where they want to go.

So why not have both?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SenorSpur

Your typical, run-of-the-mill, NBA player simply doesn't have that luxury and ultimately doesn't care that much about winning a title. It's a sad fact, but true. For the average NBA player, it's far more important to secure the salary and privledged lifestyle for as long as they can.

As long as there are owners and GMs willing overvalue talent by carelessly throwing money around and giving maximum contracts to average players, we'll continued to see this trend.

Championships are fine, but they do not provide financial security of say a big contract.

---

Yep. I guess that's what separates professional sports from amateur sports. Winning ISN'T as important to professionals. Seems kind of oxymoronic, but it's true. At least in team sports.

In individual professional sports (golf, tennis, boxing), winning is the most important thing, because that's where the money is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peskypesky

I wasn't talking just about Maggette. I was talking about most free agents. And I never said it was a guarantee that Maggette would win a Championship with the Spurs, but you really think he'll have anywhere as good a shot with the Warriors? Really?

---

Maggette's situation is really an interesting one and it illustrates your point beautifully. Here's an above average player, making a slightly above-average salary. Yet he's grown weary of his current organization and the losing culture. What does he do? He shops himself and finds his market value to be very good - not max money - but very good. When faced with joining an established, proven, championship contender, where he knows he will win and may even set himself up for a bigger contract in 2-3 years, he chose to take more money from a proven losing franchise. The end result: he got paid, yet he's still in the same losing situation. And there's no sign that will change anytime soon.

As I've stated, I don't begrudge Maggette at all for his decision. As long as he can live with his decision, more power to him. I just don't want to here nothing about him being tired of losing ever again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peskypesky

Yep. I guess that's what separates professional sports from amateur sports. Winning ISN'T as important to professionals. Seems kind of oxymoronic, but it's true. At least in team sports.

In individual professional sports (golf, tennis, boxing), winning is the most important thing, because that's where the money is.

---

That's where the Spurs are really and truly a throwback organization.

Winning matters, but winning the right way is paramount. The components of fiscal responsibility, teamwork, and high character (on and off the court) and characteristics that are no longer "in vogue" today.

And the media will maybe begin to talk about this but then completely ignore the Spurs. Parker, Manu, Tim could all be making lots more than they are but who gives a fuck. It's the Spurs.


That's life. At least we know the truth.

Think about it....that's they way it is in life.

It seems like a small sacrifice to us because we aren't making that kind of money.

But if it you think of it this way: If a company that is an industry leader comes to me and offers me $60,000 a year to work for them then that sounds good right. It would be nice working for the industry leader and being able to claim you are with the top dog.

Now, right before you take the job at the top dog, a small start company in the same industry offers you a job for $100,000 a year. This company will probably never be a top dog company, but what the fuck do you care? You would be making an extra $40,000 a year.

Sure, it would be nice working for the big dog if all things were equal, but when it comes down to it, the almighty dollar is where it's at.

They play for money, everything else is secondary. Are you going to go to a job that pays you less? Most likely not, unless you're kidding yourself. Some people enjoy winning, but most like money. No matter what a team says or their fans say, a championship is not guaranteed. Every single day of the week I'd choose to go to the Bucks or whatever crappy team you don't like for 50 million than go to whatever team is "going to win the championship" for 32 million.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oligarchy

They play for money, everything else is secondary. Are you going to go to a job that pays you less? Most likely not, unless you're kidding yourself. Some people enjoy winning, but most like money. No matter what a team says or their fans say, a championship is not guaranteed. Every single day of the week I'd choose to go to the Bucks or whatever crappy team you don't like for 50 million than go to whatever team is "going to win the championship" for 32 million.

---

I know this is true. But isn't it weird that professional athletes, who are paid to perform and win, DON'T have winning as their main goal? It just seems so illogical. But hey....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peskypesky

I know this is true. But isn't it weird that professional athletes, who are paid to perform and win, DON'T have winning as their main goal? It just seems so illogical. But hey....

---

Most of the kids come up from nothing and their dream is make big money. Look at Lebron wanting to the be the richest man evAR! If that doesn't tell you a professional basketball player's mentality, I don't know what else would. Those who accept less to win are on the downside of a career.

The coin makes the world modern and keeps it turning. These players are ALL correct to chase the almighty dollar. They are already playing the game they love, they are in the world's elite league. What's the matter with you guys who criticize these players for seeking heftier paydays!? If the owners keep throwing out cash and the fans keep accepting high ticket and merchandise costs, more power to the players.

I feel that I have strong morals, principles and try to set a good example for humanity in my daily actions. And I would not expect to be judged if my professional career were NBA baller and I opted to earn $2 million more playing for the Grizzlies over the Spurs. I would take that extra pay in a heartbeat.

The winners here are Elton Brand and Corey Maggette. Props to them. They are already in the profession they love, and they accepted tendered compensation for their services. Great decision by both. :clap

Don't like it? Then hope for another lockout or another league with lower revenue and strict salary caps.

i dont have a problem with maggette. im happy for him that a team was stupid enough to overpay him. its also not fair to say money over championships, theres no guarantee the warriors wont turn it around in 3 years, they do have a nice young team. unless maggette "promised" that he would come over and gave us a verbal agreement, i see no problems with his behavior.

Aye, aye, tell 'em that it's Human Nature.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GrandeDavid

The coin makes the world modern and keeps it turning. These players are ALL correct to chase the almighty dollar. They are already playing the game they love, they are in the world's elite league. What's the matter with you guys who criticize these players for seeking heftier paydays!? If the owners keep throwing out cash and the fans keep accepting high ticket and merchandise costs, more power to the players.

I feel that I have strong morals, principles and try to set a good example for humanity in my daily actions. And I would not expect to be judged if my professional career were NBA baller and I opted to earn $2 million more playing for the Grizzlies over the Spurs. I would take that extra pay in a heartbeat.

---

I'd also take the heftier salary merely for the fact that at any one point, you could have a career ending injury. That 18-million you threw out window would be looking mighty good while you pawn your ring.

The better question should be, why in hell does Golden State offer someone like Corey Maggette that much cash...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soul_Patch

The better question should be, why in hell does Golden State offer someone like Corey Maggette that much cash...

---

Panic move, gotta do something when you lose your best player and have nothing to show for it.Then can't get best avail. with all new caproom.

Thats exactly the reason The Warriors never ammount to shit.

lewis co-signed

Quote:

---

In my ideal world, the league would try to rectify the situation by adding some incentive for players to want to win a Championship. You know, something like prize money?

---

You've got to be kidding.

It's a business. Money first, championships second, especially for the younger guys.

If you were a pro and had the Spurs offering you 5.5 million, GS about 8 million, would you really turn down the extra 3 million when you figure you've got this contract plus one more left in your career?

Come on...

LMAO @ Spurs fans.

99.9 of posters here would pick 10mil or whatever it was over a championship. That money can be used for family, friends, etc. Maggot still got plenty of time to get a ship.

I'll change my affiliation to the Lakers right now for a million dollars. I'm not sure why anyone would expect a professional basketball player to be any different. Guys that are willing to do that are the exception not the rule.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cant w8 4 2012

Panic move, gotta do something when you lose your best player and have nothing to show for it.Then can't get best avail. with all new caproom.

---

Exactly. I would take this a step further to say that Don Nelson is a complete dumb-ass and is only exceeded by Chris Mullin, who obviously is giving Nellie all the toys he wants to play with. The reason these guys are dumb-asses is because they bring all these parts in, without regards as to how they fit together.

I'm all for guys securing their financial futures too, but I do find it funny when someone chooses, let's say, a mediocre team offering 5 yrs/60 mil over a very good team offering 5 yrs/54 mil. There comes a point when you've got more money then you will ever need and your children and grandchildren are set, too. Plus the NBA is one of the few companies in the world where someone making 5 million a year is considered underpaid.

I remember once reading a story about Babe Ruth: after signing a new deal with the Yankees making him the highest paid player in baseball, a reporter asked him: "Babe, do you think it's fair that you make more money than the president of the United States?" Ruth answered: "Well, yes-- I had a better year than he did!" Good answer, huh? This just shows how far sports salaries have come. Now, an average starter in the NBA who has never made the all-star team can easily make more money than the President, the Vice president, his state's governor, his city's mayor, his two senators, and all of his state's house of representatives members... combined.... and his agent will still claim he's underpaid.

This is sort of off topic, but didn't Tim Duncan restructure his contract like a year or two ago, so we could resign Manu, or was it someone else? Regardless, that is an example of a player putting winning over money. How many players would restructure their contracts or alter them for the sake of getting a player to help you win more? I think we may be the only organization in the NBA willing to go that far.

Ignore the little bitch replies. You are right.

Somebody has to say it and you did a nice job. It's the truth, and people will always have issues dealing with it.

Example? See Scola.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tully365

when you've got more money then you will ever need and your children and grandchildren are set, too.

---

wake up. even 60 mil is not enough money for an average NBA player and his family and friends. Exhibit A: Latrell Sprewell

and the example of Duncan giving up some money, or Arenas is irrelevant here. That's a different story, they are already in their teams for years and consider their teamates their family.

Timing and luck play a role in who gets money, see Chris Dudley. It's really hard to blame a guy for taking a lot more money when he has an opportunity. The newspapers would be really boring if every jock said "If the money's the same, I'll always choose the team I think has a better chance of winning."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hater

wake up. even 60 mil is not enough money for an average NBA player and his family and friends. Exhibit A: Latrell Sprewell

and the example of Duncan giving up some money, or Arenas is irrelevant here. That's a different story, they are already in their teams for years and consider their teamates their family.

---

Thanks, I'm wide awake. Latrell Sprewell is stupid, and could waste any amount of money. Few people are as arrogant as Spree. Lots of players who made much less than him are set for life by investing and using their money wisely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tully365

Thanks, I'm wide awake. Latrell Sprewell is stupid, and could waste any amount of money. Few people are as arrogant as Spree. Lots of players who made much less than him are set for life by investing and using their money wisely.

---

care to name a few?

and do not list any superstars that got sponsorships...

Hypothetically... in 2000, if the Orlando Magic offered Tim Duncan a max contract and the Spurs counter-offered with a contract that was worth approx. 70% of that contract, would Duncan still have stayed? To a man, I bet most Spurs fans believe that he would because "that's the type of selfless player Timmy is" and "he would do that to ensure the Spurs would maintain a championship level."

But you know what? He didn't have to make that decision because the Spurs matched the offer the Magic would have given him. If they were so sure Tim would have done that, why didn't they sign him for less? Because even these "supposed" selfless players only concerned with winning want to get paid their value as well.

Duncan took a paycut on his extension after he got a max deal. I keep seeing these criticisms of players taking money over winning and the examples of Duncan and Bowen as "different" kinds of people. That's a load of B.S. to me. Duncan got paid. And, even with his paycut, he's still getting PAID. And, then a player like Karl Malone who takes the LLE for a season at the end of his career is "riding the coattails of other superstars." It's damned if you do, damned if you don't.

And, while some Spurs fans might not want to admit it, the Spurs as an organization is not a sure-fire shot at winning another title with this core group of players. And, they look to decline with the decline of Duncan. Some players might want to not only compete to win, but compete to win over the course of a five year contract, not for one or two more years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamStone

Hypothetically... in 2000, if the Orlando Magic offered Tim Duncan a max contract and the Spurs counter-offered with a contract that was worth approx. 70% of that contract, would Duncan still have stayed? To a man, I bet most Spurs fans believe that he would because "that's the type of selfless player Timmy is" and "he would do that to ensure the Spurs would maintain a championship level."

But you know what? He didn't have to make that decision because the Spurs matched the offer the Magic would have given him. If they were so sure Tim would have done that, why didn't they sign him for less? Because even these "supposed" selfless players only concerned with winning want to get paid their value as well.

Duncan took a paycut on his extension after he got a max deal. I keep seeing these criticisms of players taking money over winning and the examples of Duncan and Bowen as "different" kinds of people. That's a load of B.S. to me. Duncan got paid. And, even with his paycut, he's still getting PAID. And, then a player like Karl Malone who takes the LLE for a season at the end of his career is "riding the coattails of other superstars." It's damned if you do, damned if you don't.

And, while some Spurs fans might not want to admit it, the Spurs as an organization is not a sure-fire shot at winning another title with this core group of players. And, they look to decline with the decline of Duncan. Some players might want to not only compete to win, but compete to win over the course of a five year contract, not for one or two more years.

---

:lol What a fucking joke. You're damned either way? :lol

Geez there is no way to even start picking apart that lame fucking post. Seriously, "Duncan is still getting PAID" :lol:lol irl.

And about your last little spit. We are still in better shape than your Peon's. So fuck off with that dumb shit.

My question is, how bad will Pop wanna beat GS in there first meeting next season? He has gotta be a little ticked off and will wanna get some revenge....

Corey Magette said at first that money didn't matter and that he just wanted to go to a winning team. Well now we know that was a lie since he went to the Warriors who most likely won't make the playoffs again

I think money will be the determining factor. If you want to get the best FA's, I think a teams' players and coaches need to do a lot of public relations work and convince available FA's to come win with them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hater

care to name a few?

and do not list any superstars that got sponsorships...

---

Steve Kerr, Mario Elie, Danny Ferry, Terry Porter, Sean Eliot, Bruce Bowen, Brent Barry, Oberto, Rasho, Gregg Popovich.... should I keep going? None of these guys are bankrupt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brutalis

And about your last little spit. We are still in better shape than your Peon's. So fuck off with that dumb shit.

---

Typical response that has nothing to do with what I said. The Piston have been done competing for championships with their core group of players. They were done after the 2005 NBA Finals. I still rooted for them and hoped I was wrong, but I've never claimed the Pistons are world beaters or better than the Spurs. Of course with no real retort, you resort to "my team is better than your team." Get a fucking clue. It isn't about the Pistons competing. I merely said the Spurs were on the deline. Not compared to the Pistons or any other team.

Go do some squats in a cucumber patch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brutalis

:lol What a fucking joke. You're damned either way? :lol

Geez there is no way to even start picking apart that lame fucking post. Seriously, "Duncan is still getting PAID" :lol:lol irl.

---

Duncan is still a top 10 highest paid player in the league this year and next year. You'd think the way some of you talk about this "selfless" player, he was making the MLE.

KG restructured his contract and when his extension came around, he took an even bigger paycut than Duncan. Yet Spurs fans still blast him for being the reason the Wolves couldn't put talent around him.

How is winning championships so much more important to Duncan than winning when he still took a max contract? He was already with a championship caliber team. His loyalties weren't tested because he got max money and the team that drafted him was a championship caliber team. If Duncan was drafted by Charlotte and went to the Spurs for the MLE, that would show a commitment to winning over money. He didn't do that. He didn't have to do that. Yet, Spurs fan still kick and scream that other players are selfish and take money over winning, "not like Duncan." It's a bunch of crock. Duncan never had to make that decision.

Duncan did not do anything special, even with his "pay cut" he is making more than Brand will be making with this new Philly deal. What Tim did was way overblown...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lakaluva

Maybe your sweetheart Duncan should give up some of his 20+mil to get some of those players that you guys covet so much. Spurs fans love to make it seem like Duncan signed for less money to make the team better. That fucker is still the 8th highest player in the league. If Duncan wanted to win another ring, he would have given up 2 or 3 million off of his 20+million contract.

---

That's actually a good point. Maybe Duncan should've offered to forego a few million so the Spurs could get a Maggette-caliber player.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DPG21920

Duncan did not do anything special, even with his "pay cut" he is making more than Brand will be making with this new Philly deal. What Tim did was way overblown...

---

Duncan has accomplished a lot more than Brand. What Duncan did was pay back the team that has in the past rewarded him. Is it unheard of? No. But is it rare, and therefore special? Yes. It doesn't happen very often in the NBA.

Duncan's last contract plus the extensions amounted to over $140 million. He's a top 10 paid player this upcoming season, and is scheduled as of right now to be the fourth highest player paid in the following season. His "paycut" amounts to about $3 1/2 million from about $22 million down to around $18 million. He'll still be one of the top paid players in his "paycut" salary years at an age where players typically get paid much, much less anyway.

What Duncan did was not special. Is he worth the money he's making? As far as NBA contracts go, absolutely. Is Duncan a good guy? Definitely appears to be. Is he a rare and special saint for taking a a couple fewer million dollars after making well over $150 million in the course of his professional career? Don't kid yourselves. A paycut would have been Duncan dropping from $22 million down to about $10-12 million a year. What Duncan did was hardly worth mentioning and is absolutely not worth the sainthood some Spurs fans attach to it.

Duncan is a saint. Go fuck yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant

Duncan is a saint. Go fuck yourself.

---

I don't think I've laughed harder all day. :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamStone

Duncan's last contract plus the extensions amounted to over $140 million. He's a top 10 paid player this upcoming season, and is scheduled as of right now to be the fourth highest player paid in the following season. His "paycut" amounts to about $3 1/2 million from about $22 million down to around $18 million. He'll still be one of the top paid players in his "paycut" salary years at an age where players typically get paid much, much less anyway.

What Duncan did was not special. Is he worth the money he's making? As far as NBA contracts go, absolutely. Is Duncan a good guy? Definitely appears to be. Is he a rare and special saint for taking a a couple fewer million dollars after making well over $150 million in the course of his professional career? Don't kid yourselves. A paycut would have been Duncan dropping from $22 million down to about $10-12 million a year. What Duncan did was hardly worth mentioning and is absolutely not worth the sainthood some Spurs fans attach to it.

---

you're right on...i don't know why some Spurs fans are so blind to it. what TD did was nice, but it wasn't anything that special. and if he wants to win in the latter part of his career...maybe he should think about restructuring his deal. i'm not a CBA expert but you fucks can figure it out...

Go fuck yourself too.

hahahahahahahahahahaha

hilarious. you're bitching about players choosing money over championships. what about our own pathetic spurs front office. if there's anyone that has shown they'd prefer money over championships, it's that worthless piece of shit Holt.

Its not like the Spurs system is super friendly to guys just coming in. EVERYONE has always struggled. The Spurs problem is there aren't any solid 30-32 year old players who have been in the league for awhile and feel this may be there "last chance." If you play in the league and you watch the Spurs...I can't think of 1 of these free agents who would think, "wow, I wanna go play in the Spurs system." You get used irregularly...the rotation is inconsistent at best...you have to sit and watch players like Finley suck all year, but still you don't play...why go to the Spurs?LOL...j/k. kinda. Anyway, I don't see a huge draw as to why any of the guys out there would "want" to go to San Antonio...I know, I know...4 titles, blah, blah, blah...non of these guys are in that stage of their career,and none want to be 4th fiddle to Tim, Manu, or Tony....and maybe even sit behind a guy like Bruce Bowen who averages 4pts a game and is more of an offensive liability, then a defensive stopper at this point in his career. (Overall)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peskypesky

Well, once again, it's clear that for most players in the NBA, pursuing a Championship is a secondary consideration, the first being money. Players who are already multi-multi-millionaires turn down chances to be with contenders, and choose to go with crappy teams that offer a little more money.

We've seen this over the years but it just seems like it's getting worse. There's probably no cure, and maybe it's good because it spreads talent throughout the league. That's the idea of the salary cap, right?

But as a Spurs fan, it just galls me year after year to see these players pass on a proven Champion like the Spurs, to go play with the Clippers or the Warriors or whoever. You would think that the chance of getting a ring would work in the Spurs' favor, but it doesn't. It always seems to pale in comparison to that extra 2 or 3 million dollars.

In my ideal world, the league would try to rectify the situation by adding some incentive for players to want to win a Championship. You know, something like prize money? That's what boxers and tennis players compete for. Imagine if there was some incentive to winning a Championship besides just a ring and "bragging rights"? I think then you'd see players wanting to be on better teams like the Spurs, and possibly playing harder.

But I'm biased on this because I'm a Spurs fan. For the rest of league, this system is probably a good thing. :depressed

---

Because people are greedy. I don't know how people can live with themselves with their 200 room homes and 50 car garages. Your salary comes from all those cheering fans. Maybe give something back to them like a school or something.

Latrell Sprewell is a joke of a human.

If you pay me about 150 million dollars you might be surprised to find that I'd be willing to part with a few million over a few years in order to win.